Jim Tunney: Too much leeway for appeals

So the story goes: after several verbal warnings by his mother, the teenage boy (let's call him "Sam") continued to arrive home well past the agreed hour. Finally, enough was enough and Mom said, "Sam, you're grounded for a week."

Perhaps as a parent or guardian you said the same to your youngster. Sam responded in protest, "I'm going to appeal!" Laughter could be heard throughout the neighborhood.

You're going to appeal? Yeah, right! To whom! What authority has jurisdiction over the rights of a parent in this type of situation? What about the principle of shared governance that guides many businesses and organizations? Should it apply to households?

As an educator for more than three decades, it was my responsibility to maintain decorum and insure an atmosphere of order and discipline on the school grounds. The same was true during my 31-year career as an NFL referee. So discipline is in my DNA.

Regarding the NFL and its discipline of players, coaches, and officials, the issue of Ed Reed's infractions and right of appeal is in the news. Reed, a Baltimore Ravens defensive back, was suspended by the NFL for what was deemed "repeated violations of the rule prohibiting hits to the head and neck area of defenseless players."

The suspension was for one game. Reed would forfeit his single-game salary of $423,529 and, if you're doing the math, that's about $7 million per season. But, wait! The next day that decision was overturned and Reed was allowed to play for the Ravens the following Sunday, fined a mere $50,000. Looks like Reed won the Powerball for about $373,529!

The question here is neither about Reed nor his egregious on-field behavior, rather it's about the process of discipline and one's right to appeal. There are other NFL players currently "suspended" but still playing while awaiting their appeals to be adjudicated.